The trial of Paul Hart - Day Five - Closing statements
19/12/03 | Exclusive to LTLF

It's the final day of Paul Hart's trial. He stands accused of failing as Nottingham Forest manager and dragging the team into a potential relegation battle. If found guilty, he faces the sack and 10 years unemployment. His defense counsel has one last chance to prove his innocence.

Judge Robert Wollaton: Right, I've got a golfing weekend coming up so I'd quite like it if we could get this business over with today so I don't have to worry about it.

William Snenton for the defense: Very well, m'lud. We intend to call two witnesses today.

Judge: Ok, who is the first?

Defense: We'd like to call a Mr Brian Clough.

Judge: Very well.

The usher calls Brian Clough, who is sworn in.

Usher: Please statement your full name and occupation.

Clough: My name is Brian Clough, young man, and I'm retired.

Defense: Mr Clough, you were Nottingham Forest manager between 1975 and 1993. Is this correct?

Brian: Yes it is.

Defense: During this time you were very successful. You won the League Championship and the European Cup, twice. However, since you left the club, things haven't been going to well.

Clough: That club has really gone to the dogs since I was there, I'm sorry to say.

Defense: Who do you blame for the club's recently decline in fortunes?

Clough: That idiot David Platt. He spent so much money on absolute garbage in his time at the City Ground. It was criminal what he did to that club!

Defense: I see. So you do not think Paul Hart is to blame?

Clough: No I don't. He's paying for the mistakes made by Pratt. There aren't many managers who could have done what Paul's done with no money. I just think it's a shame that he can't spend money and get the club back where they belong.

Defense: What is your personal opinion of Paul Hart?

Clough: He was a solid centre-back when he played for me. He seems to have a good head on him and knows how to handle his players well.

Defense: Thank you very much, Mr Clough.

Jeremy Radcliffe for the prosecution: Mr Clough, you had a drinking problem in the eighties and early nineties, didn't you?

Defense: Objection! The witness has been off drink for some time now and recently had a live-saving operation to replace his liver.

Judge: Objection sustained. The jury will disregard that question.

Prosecution: Mr Clough, it has been over ten years since you retired from football management. The game has changed an awful lot in that time. What makes you think you still know what does and does not make a good manager?

Clough: Listen, young man, there is only one thing that makes a good manager and that is results. Paul Hart got Forest into the play-offs and in my book, that makes him a good manager.

Prosecution: If results are the only way to judge a manager then on recent form I think we can say Paul Hart is not a very good manager.

Clough: And if people got sacked after a few bad results, I would never have got anywhere in football. It takes a long time to turn a club around, especially when you have no money. Give Paul time and he will get it right.

Prosecution: [To the judge] No more questions, m'lud.

Judge: You may go, Mr Clough.

Clough: Thank you, young man.

Brian Clough leaves the witness stand. The defense calls its second and final witness of the day.

Usher: [To the witness] Please statement your full name and occupation.

Witness: My name is John Gregory and I am currently unemployed.

Defense: Mr Gregory, you have been called before this court because you are the perfect example of a bad manager. You have been a manager since 1989 and had a total of five clubs. At all but one of these clubs you lost more games than you won. You spent over £50million at Aston Villa but failed to secure Champions League football. In your last job, you were unable to save Derby County from relegation and then took the team into a successive relegation battle.

Gregory: Yes, that's true. I am a very bad manager.

Defense: You are such a bad manager that you thought Fabrizio Ravanelli was a good player for a whole season, when any idiot could have worked out that he is dreadful within about five minutes.

Gregory: I am a complete and utter moron.

Defense: Very true. When your Derby County side played Paul Hart's Forest on the 19th of March this year, what was the result?

Gregory: They beat us 3-0.

Defense: Now surely if Paul Hart was a bad manager like you, his team would not have beaten yours?

Gregory: Nope. They played very well.

Defense: Exactly, because you are a terrible manager who nearly got your side relegated two times in a row, while Paul Hart is a good manager who took his team to the play-offs. [To the judge] No more questions.

Judge: Does the prosecution wish to question this witness?

Prosecution: That won't be necessary. The man is obviously a complete and utter imbecile.

Judge: True. Ok, well let's hear the closing statements from both counsels…

Prosecution: Thank you, m'lud. [To the jury] The results speak for themselves. Nine games without a win and the play-offs look out of reach. If the manager will not take responsibility, then who will?

He has allowed important players to leave the club, leaving himself with a team that simply isn't good enough for the task he has been set. It's all very well him complaining about injuries and his small squad, but more effort should have been made by the accused to keep hold of his best players.

Yes, the club did need to sell some players, but we have seen over the past few days how he made the wrong choices, allowing people like Marlon Harewood and Jack Lester go when it was within his powers to keep them. And their replacements make up a team that is barely good enough to stay in the First Division, let alone get promoted from it.

None of this is helped, of course, by his failing tactics and stubborn nature that won't let him admit what he has done wrong, even when he is brought before a court of law. His personal resentment to people at his own club, and even some of his players, have turned him into a figure who will do more damage to the club than recreate the successes of earlier seasons.

He should be credited for his achievement of getting Forest into the play-offs last season, but it is the immediate situation that causes concern and that must be the main priority when deciding the future of the club.

However, this success seems to have given him an ego. He stubbornly rejects players in spite of their track records out of some misguided belief that he can seek out adequate replacements. He cannot.

He has also started to eye up other jobs, expecting his fledgling reputation to carry him further up the career ladder. This selfish attempt at self-fulfillment has created a sense of unease within his own team, draining confidence and creating instability.

The longer Paul Hart remains manager, the more damage he will do to the team. More players will be sold, more inadequate replacements will be signed. Team spirit will continue to diminish and the bad results will continue to come, until it is too late to save the club from relegation and financial doom.

That is why, for the good of the club, you must find Paul Hart guilty of the charges he faces.

Defense: If this court finds my client guilty of these charges, it will not be for the benefit of the club. For Paul Hart is not the reason Forest are doing badly at the moment.

Whomever should have the misfortune of taking over from him will find exactly the same problems he is currently suffering from: a thinning squad, the pressure to sell players, limited resources to make signings, an interfering chairman who publicly claims to support the manager while at the same time undermining him and his position…

The list goes on, points all of which give us real reasons why this club is currently struggling that do not require turning to the nearest scapegoat as the prosecution would have us do.

Paul Hart has done all he need do for us to accept his abilities, but there are limits to what any man could do in these circumstances. Imagine trying to tempt quality players to your team with only £4,000 a week when they expect so much more - amounts that other clubs are very willing to pay.

Imagine building a team and coming so close to promotion, then being forced to sell key players from that team, the only benefit being that you get to pick which players are sold yourself, meaning you can take all the blame when it all goes wrong.

Most people would not put up with conditions like these, but the fact that Paul Hart is still determined to find success even in these conditions, demonstrates that he is committed to the club 100 percent.

Where else are Forest going to find a manager who is not only prepared to work under the conditions I have described, but is also able to get results? Given a bit of support, Paul Hart has shown that he will bring in results. That is why Paul Hart must not be found guilty.

Judge: [To the jury] You will now retire to decide your verdict. I will accept a majority decision. Between you, you must decide whether or not Paul Hart is to blame for the club's current situation.

Obviously in cases such as this, blame can be spread to many people. What you must decide is whether or not the defendant should accept the largest proportion or blame, and whether or not his sacking would be a benefit or a hindrance to Nottingham Forest.